Review Assignment
Accessibility: The Current Situation and New Directions
(Ariadne, Issue 44)
In his paper, “Accessibility: The Current Situation and New Directions” (2005), Kevin Carey tries to outline what needs to be done to enhance accessibility to digital information systems by disabled people. The first part of his paper deals with definitions of terminology he will use later in his paper. Most relevant are his definitions of ‘Accessibility’ and ‘Disabled People’. Carey defines accessibility simply as “the capability of a system to cater for the needs of disabled people.” Techniques such as audio/video description, print modification, signing, simplification, speech synthesis and sub-titling are offered as examples of accessibility methodologies. “The core of people who experience accessibility problems as the primary barrier in their use of digital information systems are classifiable as ‘Disabled’.” Carey suggests disabling syndromes can be grouped into four clusters: Learning/cognitive/developmental; Physical/motor; Deafness/hearing impairment; Blindness/visual impairment. Carey proceeds to discuss five areas that he feels need to be addressed in order to enhance accessibility.
First, Carey suggests, “concentrate on digital data design and creation to see that it accords with basic rules.” Carey offers three principles for creating accessible digital information: create multi-modally and enable multi-modal interaction; enable customization and simplification; and enable channel and user interface choice. Secondly, Carey suggests the development of programmable user interfaces. He sees the user interface as one of the greatest obstacles to accessibility and the chief problem with all user interface control panels, including keyboards, numeric keypads, remote control devices and screens is that they are not standard. The open market in design has had disastrous albeit unintended consequences for disabled people and has left them increasingly impotent as technology has miniaturized and become less standardized. Carey’s answer to this problem is “the individual, all purpose, programmable user interface which can be ‘BlueToothed’ to any processor and/or receiver.” This leads directly to Carey’s third point which is to “take advantage of cable-free user interfaces, particularly screens and keyboards.” Carey supports the use of “Bluetooth” specifications for the creation of wireless personal area networks (PANs). It provides a way to connect and exchange information between devices via a secure, low-cost, globally available short-range radio frequency (Wikipedia, 2005). Such a programmable user interface would allow for the development of functionality based on user need and user skill at a relatively low cost, according to Carey. Fourthly, Carey discusses the specific issues of accessibility in the context of formal learning and suggests the installation of data provision systems that respond to user behaviour. The exploding quantity of information available in addition to the way that data choices are displayed presents serious problems for disabled people. For most of us, the solution is to learn how to define a search, but Carey argues that a more satisfactory solution is the use of a system that adjusts to user behaviour over time. “Such a system would ‘learn’ what the user is interested in and the professional level of that interest.” Carey feels that this is the most important assistance that disabled people can be given. Finally, Carey supports the provision of blended learning facilities that allow students and tutors to share on-screen displays and discuss work in progress. These environments are important to disabled people who are sometimes thwarted by what most people might consider to be trivial barriers.
Carey contends that none of these proposed solutions is science fiction. “All components for effective accessibility in a converged data ecology exist but they need to be creatively combined.” (Carey, 2005) It is interesting to note at this point that Carey makes no mention throughout his paper or in his references to the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (http://www.w3.org) and its Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) (http://www.w3.org/WAI) whose mission is to develop strategies, guidelines and resources to make the Web accessible to people with disabilities. While Carey promotes the idea of ‘creative collaboration’ (Carey, 2005), his references refer to articles primarily written by him. On the other hand, the W3C and WAI are sponsored by an international consortium of member organizations, including Industry Canada’s Assistive Devices Industry Office. Through their membership in W3C and the WAI working group, Common Look and Feel (CLF) standards adopted by all Government of Canada (GoC) websites are aligned with W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines and ensure equitable access to all content on GoC Web sites. (CLF, 2004) In a paper previously submitted by this writer on the Government of Canada Website project, the issue of interoperability between GoC Web sites was raised. W3C addresses the need for interoperable technologies (specifications, guidelines, software and tools) on its website in an understandable and ‘open’ way. (W3C, 2005) In fact, viewing the W3C and WAI websites helps to put Carey’s discussion into context. While Carey makes it sound like no one but he and his company HumanITy is doing anything about the issue of accessibility, in fact it is through the W3C that Internet accessibility has become a global issue. Software and system designers from around the world are invited to submit comments and contribute to the work of the W3C and its working groups in an open source type model.
“The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.” (Berners-Lee, T. cited in WAI, 2005) The development of universal accessibility guidelines ensures that anyone can obtain content regardless of the technologies they use. While the WAI’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (1999) seem to have been recognized by the international standards community, Carey does not acknowledge that they exist. As these guidelines continue to be tested and evolve over time, developers and users will become more proficient in applying them to Internet usage. Carey’s hope that “industries emerging from the analogue era can learn from each other and can, in addition, develop new standards” (Carey, 2005) may be closer than he thinks.
References
Bluetooth (2005). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/bluetooth
Carey, K. (2005). Accessibility: The Current Situation and New Directions. Ariadne,
Issue 44. Retrieved from http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue44/carey/intro.html
CLF for the Internet – Accessibility (2004). Retrieved from
www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/clf-nsi/inter/inter-01-00_e.asp
W3C World Wide Web Consortium Homepage (2005). Retrieved from
http://www.w3.org/
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Homepage (2005). Retrieved from
http://www.w3/org/WAI/
(Ariadne, Issue 44)
In his paper, “Accessibility: The Current Situation and New Directions” (2005), Kevin Carey tries to outline what needs to be done to enhance accessibility to digital information systems by disabled people. The first part of his paper deals with definitions of terminology he will use later in his paper. Most relevant are his definitions of ‘Accessibility’ and ‘Disabled People’. Carey defines accessibility simply as “the capability of a system to cater for the needs of disabled people.” Techniques such as audio/video description, print modification, signing, simplification, speech synthesis and sub-titling are offered as examples of accessibility methodologies. “The core of people who experience accessibility problems as the primary barrier in their use of digital information systems are classifiable as ‘Disabled’.” Carey suggests disabling syndromes can be grouped into four clusters: Learning/cognitive/developmental; Physical/motor; Deafness/hearing impairment; Blindness/visual impairment. Carey proceeds to discuss five areas that he feels need to be addressed in order to enhance accessibility.
First, Carey suggests, “concentrate on digital data design and creation to see that it accords with basic rules.” Carey offers three principles for creating accessible digital information: create multi-modally and enable multi-modal interaction; enable customization and simplification; and enable channel and user interface choice. Secondly, Carey suggests the development of programmable user interfaces. He sees the user interface as one of the greatest obstacles to accessibility and the chief problem with all user interface control panels, including keyboards, numeric keypads, remote control devices and screens is that they are not standard. The open market in design has had disastrous albeit unintended consequences for disabled people and has left them increasingly impotent as technology has miniaturized and become less standardized. Carey’s answer to this problem is “the individual, all purpose, programmable user interface which can be ‘BlueToothed’ to any processor and/or receiver.” This leads directly to Carey’s third point which is to “take advantage of cable-free user interfaces, particularly screens and keyboards.” Carey supports the use of “Bluetooth” specifications for the creation of wireless personal area networks (PANs). It provides a way to connect and exchange information between devices via a secure, low-cost, globally available short-range radio frequency (Wikipedia, 2005). Such a programmable user interface would allow for the development of functionality based on user need and user skill at a relatively low cost, according to Carey. Fourthly, Carey discusses the specific issues of accessibility in the context of formal learning and suggests the installation of data provision systems that respond to user behaviour. The exploding quantity of information available in addition to the way that data choices are displayed presents serious problems for disabled people. For most of us, the solution is to learn how to define a search, but Carey argues that a more satisfactory solution is the use of a system that adjusts to user behaviour over time. “Such a system would ‘learn’ what the user is interested in and the professional level of that interest.” Carey feels that this is the most important assistance that disabled people can be given. Finally, Carey supports the provision of blended learning facilities that allow students and tutors to share on-screen displays and discuss work in progress. These environments are important to disabled people who are sometimes thwarted by what most people might consider to be trivial barriers.
Carey contends that none of these proposed solutions is science fiction. “All components for effective accessibility in a converged data ecology exist but they need to be creatively combined.” (Carey, 2005) It is interesting to note at this point that Carey makes no mention throughout his paper or in his references to the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (http://www.w3.org) and its Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) (http://www.w3.org/WAI) whose mission is to develop strategies, guidelines and resources to make the Web accessible to people with disabilities. While Carey promotes the idea of ‘creative collaboration’ (Carey, 2005), his references refer to articles primarily written by him. On the other hand, the W3C and WAI are sponsored by an international consortium of member organizations, including Industry Canada’s Assistive Devices Industry Office. Through their membership in W3C and the WAI working group, Common Look and Feel (CLF) standards adopted by all Government of Canada (GoC) websites are aligned with W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines and ensure equitable access to all content on GoC Web sites. (CLF, 2004) In a paper previously submitted by this writer on the Government of Canada Website project, the issue of interoperability between GoC Web sites was raised. W3C addresses the need for interoperable technologies (specifications, guidelines, software and tools) on its website in an understandable and ‘open’ way. (W3C, 2005) In fact, viewing the W3C and WAI websites helps to put Carey’s discussion into context. While Carey makes it sound like no one but he and his company HumanITy is doing anything about the issue of accessibility, in fact it is through the W3C that Internet accessibility has become a global issue. Software and system designers from around the world are invited to submit comments and contribute to the work of the W3C and its working groups in an open source type model.
“The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect.” (Berners-Lee, T. cited in WAI, 2005) The development of universal accessibility guidelines ensures that anyone can obtain content regardless of the technologies they use. While the WAI’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (1999) seem to have been recognized by the international standards community, Carey does not acknowledge that they exist. As these guidelines continue to be tested and evolve over time, developers and users will become more proficient in applying them to Internet usage. Carey’s hope that “industries emerging from the analogue era can learn from each other and can, in addition, develop new standards” (Carey, 2005) may be closer than he thinks.
References
Bluetooth (2005). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/bluetooth
Carey, K. (2005). Accessibility: The Current Situation and New Directions. Ariadne,
Issue 44. Retrieved from http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue44/carey/intro.html
CLF for the Internet – Accessibility (2004). Retrieved from
www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/clf-nsi/inter/inter-01-00_e.asp
W3C World Wide Web Consortium Homepage (2005). Retrieved from
http://www.w3.org/
Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Homepage (2005). Retrieved from
http://www.w3/org/WAI/
posted by Jenny at 8:22 AM
1 comments
